Suburb has to allow bus to pass through
Jesus, the suburbs. Hampstead tried to block the 51 bus route from passing along one of its streets, but a Superior Court decision has allowed this noisy, filthy vehicle of the hoi polloi to continue polluting the suburb’s pristine streets. Andy Riga says the fight has gone on for six years, but the 51 has passed through Hampstead much longer than that.
Taylor C. Noakes 12:41 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
What I’d do:
Erect massive barbed-wire fences around the on-island, unincorporated communities (like Hampstead or Westmount) with a few armed checkpoints, remove all services (including SPVM, STM etc) and wait for the citizens to volunteer themselves for annexation by the City of Montreal at a higher tax-rate.
Why play nice with obstinate obstructionists?
Places like MoWest or TMR can put up fences to keep people out – it’s dispicable, they ought to be ashamed.
Or fenced in…
Marc 13:11 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
One island, one city, one city hall, one council, one mayor. That’s all. Should have been done 65 years ago.
Dan 13:11 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
Didn’t Montreal at one time absorb all these smaller towns, but then let them go?
Kate 13:36 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
If this were Facebook, Dan, I’d just respond “it’s complicated”.
Jay 13:37 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
I am not sure what the Jesus tone is about. I used to live in the area and I can tell you (as can any other drivers) that the intersection of Ellerdale and Cote-St-Luc road is a disaster during rush hours. The block where the 51 turns left is a really short block. Rare is the time the 51 can turn without at least partially blocking the intersection. Second, the average Montreal motorist is a dolt and even though there is clear signage, they budge their cars into the intersection. Traffic on Ellerdale backs to Granville which is significant. This, in turn, further frustrates delayed commuters. I do not think it is unreasonable to have the bus turn left onto CSL road a bit sooner. Nothing to do with suburbs, just something to help with the flow of traffic.
Ephraim 14:05 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
@Dan – Yes, but there are multiple problems including the fact that many of these smaller towns are/were run extremely well. Maybe that is part of the reason that I’m so frustrated with my arrondisement… I grew up in one of these smaller cities within the city and I saw how well they could be run.
Ephraim 14:23 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
@Kate – Jesus and Hampstead in the same sentence? :D
Clément 14:23 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
@Dan, I have to agree with Kate, it is complicated, but I have some reservations about the notion of these smaller cities being run well.
It’s easier to balance a budget when your main income base is very high value properties (i.e. high property tax / linear foot of street) while your main expenses are mostly snow and garbage removal, especially when your city doesn’t even have sidewalks. Throw in a small public library, a wading pool, 2 cops and a firetruck and you have a balanced budget.
A large city like Montréal has to cover higher expenses due to more expansive infrastructures, boulevards, large parks, etc, etc. Residents of Hampstead, TMR, Montreal-West, Côte-St-Luc and Montréal-Est are more than happy to use Montréal’s infrastructure to shop, work, commute, play, go out, etc while building high fences (real and virtual) around their well run cities to keep out the riffraff and heavy vehicles like buses that damage their precious streets.
Ephraim 14:29 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
@Clement – True to some extent, though as far as I know all the cities have sidewalks, but I’m not sure of Montreal-Est, though, the rest definitely do. They all contributed to a central fund and they all certainly contribute to a central fund, now.
Try to open a business in VMR and not have the fire department visit to ensure you have a fire extinguisher, fire alarms and an emergency exit for the safety of the employees and the customers.
You also didn’t hear people complaining about paying those high taxes, considering how well the town was run. And you haven’t seen city taxes until you have seen Hampstead’s, where there is no industry or commerce paying taxes to offset residential property taxes.
Jack 14:30 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
I was totally for the almagamation for this very reason. I’m with you Taylor
Clément 14:39 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
@Ephraim: I have never seen a Hampstead tax invoice, so I’ll assume by what you’re saying that the taxes are high? Doesn’t that just support my point that when you have high taxes, it’s easier to balance a budget?
As far as the sidewalks, you are right, I went on Google street view and yes, there are sidewalks in Hampstead. I was under the impression there weren’t. Is the snow removed in the winter? I grew up in a farther suburb (DDO) and the streets had no sidewalks and often, not even concrete curbs.
On your previous comment, :D indeed…
jeather 14:50 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
Hampstead has sidewalks, no library, a regular pool and a wading pool, a bunch of parks, a public school, snow removal, no commercial buildings, and massively dysfunctional municipal politics. It also contributes tax revenue to Montreal.
The 51 stops on Ellerdale near CSL are really bizarre stops — there is, or was, also two just across CSL (on what is Fielding) where the streets are wider as well as two a block away at the corner of Stratford and Queen Mary. (The 166 bus, which also goes through Hampstead, does not seem to garner objections.)
Noah 15:11 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
Hampstead is a very well-run town for the most part, but has a history of blocking sensible and obvious traffic measures for its own selfish reasoning. Anyone who has cruised down Cote St. Luc’s portion of Fleet with coordinated lights and then hit the absolutely gong-show that is Hampstead’s portion of the road knows what I’m talking about. This reeks of spoiled rich people trying to push their problems off on their less-wealthy neighbours. Not impressed.
Jack 15:50 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
You know there is one thing these rich inner city suburbs do that I admire. They make it nearly impossible to transit through them by car,Google Maps is eloquent to the rich verdant green that creates.Compare Parc Ex to TMR, Snowdon to Hampstead, its color contrasts say much about class in this city. It also says it is quite alright for Westmount, Hampstead, Outremont and TMR to regulate their through traffic because their citizens do not want to be inconvenienced by too much car or god forbid bus traffic because well you know they are rich. However when Fernandez does it in the Plateau he is a car hating ,vegan,bike riding communist.Go figure…
Ephraim 16:53 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
The snow is removed from the sidewalks and the street and quickly. They blow on to your garden, instead of cart it away, for the most part. And the taxes are VERY high. The main residential streets in Hampstead were purposely built to limit through traffic.
It doesn’t resemble what Fernandez is doing at all…. and certainly is done for all the residents, not just the streets around where the mayor lives.
Alison Cummins 18:41 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
How are the housekeepers supposed to get to their jobs?
Ian 19:02 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
How is Hampstead suburban? Laval, Pointe-Claire, the South Shore – that’s suburban. Hampstead is just a well-off residential area, and is no more suburban than residential areas of Ville-Emard or Hochelaga-Maisonneuve.
Chris 19:22 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
Ephraim, how many different streets does Ferrandez live on? because they’re done traffic calming in quite a number of places…
MB 20:20 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
@Ian, really? Are you being sarcastic? Did you actually just say Hampstead is no more suburban than the residential areas of Ville-Émard and Ho-Ma? You have to be joking, comparing two of the more poor city neighborhoods in the city with one of the absolute wealthiest suburbs in all of Canada.
Hampstead was built entirely in the 20th century using very much the same “garden city” scheme as the rest of the modern suburbs. It is built around single use zoning, detached single family homes, a street layout that deliberately prohibits or discourages through traffic, no commercial or mixed-use streets, and is car-dependent for transit. You’re not going to find any corner depanneurs, Dilallo burgers, noisy bars, Monk Boulevards, or Ontario Promenades in Hampstead. Oh, and Hampstead is also a suburb of Montreal. It is pretty much the definition of “suburban,” a nearly perfect archetype of the present understanding of the term.
On the other hand, Ville-Émard and Ho-Ma have been part of the city for more than a century, both with a rich industrial heritage, and both already laid out long before Hampstead existed. These neighborhoods have multiple transit options, mixed use zoning, a connective street grid, alleyways, commercial streets, pedestrian amenities such as buildings fronting the sidewalk, a mix of building types and ages, and include communities side-by-side throughout a wide range of income levels. Both neighborhoods consist almost entirely of multi-family row homes or semi-detached homes built on tiny plots of land often without private parking. In other words, not really much different from the rest of the city of Montreal, and a world away from Hampstead, Laval, and the other modern garden suburbs.
You were either joking, or you zip through the city with your eyes closed if you can’t tell the difference.
Jack 20:23 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
@ Ian Hampstead is a suburb in mentality and reality, look at the utter lack of densiy, the green space-Ville Emard are you kidding?
@Ephraim thank you your logic train knows no junctions it must be comforting.
Ian 21:23 on 2012/07/17 Permalink
“Suburban” is defined by density & proximity to the urban centre, not wealth. There are lots of parts of Ville-Emard and HoMa that have big yards & all that, even in the Point or Verdun. You can can say Hampstead has a suburban mentality, but the specific area the 51 runs through is no more suburban than either of the two neighbourhoods I mentioned – there’s highrises around there! Is NDG suburban? Is Westmount? If you abuse the term, it loses its specific meaning.
MB 00:54 on 2012/07/18 Permalink
“Suburban” is defined by transportation, urban design, the built environment, sometimes political boundaries, sometimes density, sometimes proximity, and especially since the late 19th century, always by zoning, *zoning*, and ZONING. I don’t get your point about density. Hampstead is less dense than the adjacent places, less dense than any borough in Montreal, with numbers similar or even lower than the other suburbs on the West Island and Laval. Your point on proximity is a bit vague–how far must you be in order to qualify as a suburb? If Hampstead isn’t a suburb…then…what is it? A city neighborhood? Urban as industrial neighborhoods like Ville-Émard and Hochelaga? I should enlighten my friends and old neighbors there that it’s no different from Hampstead. What a laughable notion.
I didn’t make my point about wealth clear. Absolute wealth is less important than the fact that people who live in Hampstead display a homogenous socio-economic profile. It’s quite the calling card of a modern suburb, and very different from NDG, Westmount, Ville-Émard, etc.
To answer your question, neither NDG or Westmount are the same all over like Hampstead or other modern suburbs, so it’s apples and oranges. Some parts are more suburban in character, some parts more urban. Neither is as urban as Ville-Émard or HoMa, nor are they as suburban as Hampstead. Dude, this isn’t rocket science. Hampstead was conceived as a residential suburb, it calls itself a suburb, it looks like other modern suburbs, it’s beyond the centre of the city, it’s car dependent, there’s no commerce or industry, it’s not dense, it fits every single definition of suburban you could come up with. It’s the place’s raison d’être. Kate was simply calling a spade a spade, pointing out the conflicts between suburban interests and those of the city centre.
I still fail to see any abuse of the term or point of contention, or really *anything* about Hampstead that resembles Montreal’s industrial neighborhoods. Maybe a two block stretch of Jolicoeur in Ville-Émard has some small single family homes with stamp-size yards but that hardly defines a neighborhood dominated by rows of duplexes and triplexes. You can find big yards in the Plateau and Centre-sud too, even places in Brooklyn. Is Hampstead like those places, too?
Also, dude, there are no high rises in Hampstead and certainly none on Queen-Mary between Ellerdale and Stratford. Is your point that the neighborhoods adjacent to Hampstead look like…Montreal? Or is it that Hampstead is like Montreal because…it is adjacent to Montreal? I’m still wondering what your point is, or how you could seriously ask “How is Hampstead suburban?” It’s obvious: every single thing about Hampstead is suburban, including the reason it exists and the motivation for building it.
Ian 06:36 on 2012/07/18 Permalink
You say “dude” a lot, but you temper passion with many well-reasoned arguments. I concede the point (mostly). I’ll admit that most of my impression of Hampstead as not really suburban is taking the 51. Hampstead comes dues west of CSL, and that border area does seem pretty urban still, not that different from residential NDG or CSL. When you go further west, yes, it definitely acquires a more suburban character.
That said… Hampstead is smack in the middle of the island. I’ll take your word for it on density (I haven’t been able to find a map of Montreal Island density that shows data for Hampstead) but Ellerdale and Queen Mary is still only 8 blocks from the Decarie Expressway, 5 blocks from the Monkland strip, there are highrise apartment buildings within the sightline and within close walking distance, and that area isn’t unlike many parts of Westmount, come down to it. There’s no deps on the Boulevard either, so whatever. Back to some earlier points, In Ville-Emard there’s lots of residential streets full of duplexes with yards plenty bigger than the Plateau (and yes, I too have friends who live there) and as long as we’re talking about big yards you can’t deny that the Point has it going on (friends there too, thanks)… not as swank as Hampstead, but…
I know Hampstead sucks and is a cultural wasteland and could even be considered suburban if you want to get into a debate of definitions but it’s still right in the middle of the city and isn’t some distant land of cars and soccer moms – it’s part of the urban environment and we have to deal with their crap. It seems to me more like an enclave for rich NIMBYism (not entirely unlike Westmount in that regard either) that should be dealt with accordingly, not seen as some foreign entity.